Santos v.

Moreno
21 SCRA 1141

PONENTE

BENGZON, J.P., J.

FACTS

The Zobel family of Spain formerly owned vast track of marshland in

the municipality of Macabebe, Pampanga province. Called Hacienda San
Esteban, it was administered and managed by the Ayala y Cia. From the year
1860 to about the year 1924 Ayala y Cia., devoted the hacienda to the
planting and cultivation of nipa palms from which it gathered nipa sap or
"tuba." It operated a distillery plant in barrio San Esteban to turn nipa tuba
into potable alcohol, which was in turn manufactured into liquor.

Accessibility through the nipa palms deep into the hacienda posed as a
problem. Ayala y Cia., therefore dug canals leading towards the hacienda's
interior where most of them interlinked with each other. The canals
facilitated the gathering of tuba and the guarding and patrolling of the
hacienda by security guards called "arundines." By the gradual process of
erosion these canals acquired the characteristics and dimensions of rivers.
In 1924 Ayala y Cia shifted from the business of alcohol production to
bangus culture. It converted Hacienda San Esteban from a forest of nipa
groves to a web of fishponds. To do so, it cut down the nipa palm,
constructed dikes and closed the canals criss-crossing the hacienda.

Sometime in 1925 or 1926 Ayala y Cia., sold a portion of Hacienda

San Esteban to Roman Santos who also transformed the swamp land into a
fishpond. In so doing, he closed and built dikes across Sapang Malauling
Maragul, Quiorang Silab, Pepangebunan, Bulacus, Nigui and Nasi.

The closing of the man-made canals in Hacienda San Esteban drew

complaints from residents of the surrounding communities. Claiming that
the closing of the canals caused floods during the rainy season, and that it
deprived them of their means of transportation and fishing grounds, said
residents demanded re-opening of those canals.

Subsequently, Mayor Lazaro Yambao of Macabebe, accompanied by

policemen and some residents went to Hacienda San Esteban and opened the
closure dikes at Sapang Malauling Maragul Nigui and Quiorang Silab.
Whereupon, Roman Santos filed Civil Case No. 4488 in the Court of First
Instance of Pampanga which preliminarily enjoined Mayor Yambao and
others from demolishing the dikes across the canals. The municipal officials

Nikki G. Estores Page 1 of 3

of Macabebe countered by filing a complaint (docketed as Civil Case No.
4527) in the same court. The Pampanga Court of First Instance rendered
judgment in both cases against Roman Santos who immediately elevated the
case to the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

Do the streams involved in this case belong to the public domain or to

the owner of Hacienda San Esteban according to law and the evidence
submitted to the Department of Public Works and Communications?

HELD

A private person may take possession of a watercourse if he

constructed the same within his property.

One and all, the evidence, oral and documentary, presented by Roman
Santos in the administrative proceedings supports the conclusion of the
lower court that the streams involved in this case were originally man-made
canals constructed by the former owners of Hacienda San Esteban and that
said streams were not held open for public use. This same conclusion was
reached 27 years earlier by an investigator of the Bureau of Public Works
whose report and recommendations were approved by the Director of Public
Works and submitted to the Secretary of Commerce and Communications.
The streams in question were artificially made, hence of private ownership.

Articles 339 of the Spanish Civil Code of 1889 provides that property
of public ownership includes that devoted to public use, such as roads,
canals, rivers, torrents, ports and bridges constructed by the State,
riverbanks, shores, roadsteads, and that of a similar character. Article 407
of the same Code provides that (1) Rivers and their natural channels; (2)
Continuous or intermittent waters from springs or brooks running in then
natural channels and the channels themselves; (3) Waters rising continuously
or intermittently on lands of public; (4) Lakes and ponds formed by nature
on public lands, and their beds; (5) Rain waters running through ravines or
sand beds, the channels of which are of public ownership; (6) Subterranean
waters on public lands; (7) Waters found within the zone of operation of
public works, even though constructed under contract; Waters which flow
continuously or intermittently from lands belonging to private persons, to the
State, to provinces, or to towns from the moment they leave such lands; and
(9) The waste waters of fountains, sewers, and public institutions are of
public ownership. Further, Article 72 of the Spanish Law of Waters (8
August 1866) provides that the water-beds on public land, of creeks
through which spring waters run, are a part of the public domain. The natural
water-beds or channels of rivers are also part of the public domain.

Nikki G. Estores Page 2 of 3

 Pursuant to Article 71 of the Spanish Law of Waters of August 3,
1866, and Article 408(5) of the Spanish Civil Code, channels of creeks and
brooks belong to the owners of estates over which they flow. The channels,
therefore, of the streams in question, which may be classified creeks, belong
to the owners of Hacienda San Esteban.

With the exception of Sapang Cansusu, being a natural stream and a

continuation of the Cansusu River, admittedly a public stream, belongs to
the public domain. Its closure therefore by the predecessors of Roman
Santos was illegal.

All the other streams, being artificial and devoted exclusively for the
use of the hacienda owner and his personnel, are declared of private
ownership. Hence, the dams across them should not he ordered demolished
as public nuisances.

Nikki G. Estores Page 3 of 3